Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Occam's Razor

William of Occam (Ockham), (1285-1347): Most of us have at least heard his name, even if we have no idea why he's remembered by history. Simply put, he is the formulator of "Occam's Razor," a concept which states that when given two or more possible explanations for something, the simpler possibility with the fewest assumptions involved is correct. Speaking in general terms, I believe he was accurate in constructing this principle.

Scientists and philosophers devoted to the naturalistic paradigm frequently have used this very idea as a whip for flogging notions of a Supreme Being out of their field-of-vision. On a personal level, I've engaged in discussions at Vox's blog, in which this offensive measure has been utilized against my viewpoint.

But how many people are familiar with William of Occam's personal beliefs? How many know that he was a Franciscan monk, and a Christian? How many have read about his theological writings, or his significant influence on Martin Luther? I dare say the answer is few to none. In this era of excising God's influence from history books, and expunging His presence from a nation once built upon Christian ideals, it should come as no surprise that the heartfelt worldviews of many who thought great thoughts in the infancy of science are locked away in dusty tomes, forgotten, neglected.

Some consider his choice of religion irrelevant. I am not numbered among them. For as those of us who have come into close contact with Christians (or are Christians) know, the teachings of Christ do not just affect how we think--but how we act. Understanding this is an integral prerequisite for a comprehensive outlook on the formation of modern science. Clearly, then, the concept of Occam's Razor is not anti-Christian in its essence; otherwise, how did a Christian come to be its originator?

Occam did not see his theory as incompatible with a Christian outlook, and nor should we. He did not intend for it to be used as an anti-God assault vehicle. When the next Darwinist hits you with Occam's Razor, while sitting back and basking in his own brilliance, use this to set him straight.

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

America's Epitaph?

"Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." --William Penn

Monday, August 29, 2005

Anything for a Story

I've often heard it said that there's a fine line between stupidity and courage. I'm not sure I agree, but I'll grant adherents to that adage that our national media coverage of Hurricane Kakillya is an exercise in one of the two. Amid all the winds of change a-blowin' down in New Awleuhns and other Southern coastal cities, we see daily footage of reporters standing by washed-out roadsides in hip-waders, in hotel parking lots where roofing debris may whip by and crush them any second, or bent nearly double in the driving rain. The slitted eyes, the death grip on the microphone, the weathered slicker buttoned up to their throats--now that takes dedication, or perhaps an adrenaline junkie. Or maybe just good old-fashioned skull-rattling idiocy. When it's raining cats and dogs--nay, Saint Bernards and tigers--you will not find me scaling the tallest tree for a better glimpse of the oncoming tornady that our beloved hurricane du jour just belched forth. Nor will you find me prancing amongst the downed power-lines as they whip back and forth, crackling at me like angry adders. You won't see me holding onto a road sign for dear life, flapping in the wind like a flag unfurled.

What's next? Hanging ten on an onrushing tsunami, for that once-in-a-lifetime chance at getting the perfect shot of a wave crest? Are we incapable of reporting on these devastating wonders of nature from the relatively safe confines of a building or news vehicle? Or is it the possibility of a toetagged reporter that draws our eyes, when Ross' effete whining on a rerun of Friends just doesn't quite do it for us? I suppose ratings are everything, these days, even at the jeopardizing of the newshound's safety.

For those of you sloshing through the gumbo in Louisiana, I wish you the best. I don't understand you, but I hope for your safety. But please remember that you're expected back at the asylum, thirty minutes after Katrina's tantrum abates.

Sunday, August 28, 2005

Poor Ol' Shep

It seems that a person trapped by Hurricane Katrina pulled the F-word and disarmed Shepard Smith:

Smith, who was reporting via telephone from the Royal Sonesta Hotel on Bourbon Street in the French Quarter of New Orleans, noted that people were still drinking and gambling at video-game machines as the hurricane was approaching.

When he asked one man what he was doing there at the hotel, the man responded, "None of your f---ing business."

When queried later, Smith assured everyone that he was recovering nicely, though his delicate sensibilities still rung a bit.

A Serious Threat

I found this important announcement floating in cyberspace:

This morning - from a cave somewhere in Pakistan - Taliban Minister of Migration, Mohammed Omar, warned the United States that if military action against Iraq continues, Taliban authorities will cut off America's supply of convenience store managers. If this action does not yield sufficient results, cab drivers will be next.

It's getting ugly.

Founding Quotes of Note XXXI

"Slavery is such an atrocious debasement of human nature, thatits very extirpation, if not performed with solicitous care,may sometimes open a source of serious evils."-- Benjamin Franklin, dead white-devil slaver

Saturday, August 27, 2005

"Kids" In Uniform

"As we approach the 2,000 mark of coffins coming home that we're not allowed to see, it doesn't even look like a war. It looks like a lot of kids being blown to smithereens by an invisible enemy." --Maureen Dowd, speaking of young soldiers in the military

This really disgusts me. People in their twenties are young, perhaps naive, maybe even inexperienced--but kids? I don't think so. People in this age-group get married, have homes and children and jobs, and go off to fight and perhaps die for causes with which they relate. Ms. Dowd diminishes their sacrifices by labeling them as mere children. I think it takes quite a bit of courage, loyalty, and a sense of duty to ship out overseas, into an unknown situation and away from one's family and familiar surroundings.

I suppose what bothers me most about Ms. Dowd's comment is that I'm sure she would not see a twenty-year-old's decision in favor of an abortion as an alternative chosen by a "kid." Oh no. Standing up for one's right to slaughter the unborn takes a real man or a real woman.

If these good folks are "kids," then I have no idea what the word "adult" means. Apparently, neither does Maureen Dowd.

Crying In the Womb

A new study has revealed that unborn babies cry within the womb. Ultrasound videos taken of infants within the womb revealed 28-week-old babies crying in response to a noise stimulus.

Scientists played a 90-decibel noise to the unborn child, roughly the equivalent of a tummy rumbling, and recorded the effect the noise had via ultrasound. “It was strikingly like an infant crying,” said New Zealand pediatrician Ed Mitchell, who contributed to the US study, according to New Zealand's The Age. “Even the bottom lip quivers.”

And this at a time when news reports inundate our televisions, assuring us that babies do not feel pain in the womb. Uh-huh. They clearly feel something, though, don't they? Who knew that a little blob of non-human jelly could emote like a real person? How bizarre.

I'm Back. . .

. . .let the standing ovation commence.

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

A Brief Interlude

I'll be offline wednesday, thursday, and most of friday. It's possible that I'll be back to regular posting friday night, but no later than saturday. I'm going with my wife to visit her father for his birthday celebration, on the western end of the state. In the meantime, be good to each other, and keep firing away, here, if you like. I'll respond in the comments section, when I return.

Liberated from Reality

In a news conference in Damascus, the leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad today boasted all Palestinian groups remain united in the goal of annihilating the Jewish state of Israel.

With Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia looking on, Ramazan Abdullah, secretary general of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, said the Palestinian Authority and all Palestinian movements have reached agreement on a joint strategy after Israel's evacuation of the Gaza Strip.

"This war would continue till full liberation of Palestine, restoration of the denied rights of the whole Palestinian nation and briefly speaking uprooting of the usurper Israeli regime," he said, according to a translation by the official Iranian Islamic Republic News Agency.

"[The] Gaza Strip that is being evacuated after thirty-eight years of occupation is only some 1.5 percent of the historic motherland of the Palestinians, and therefore its evacuation cannot mean the end of the liberation campaign," he said.

By "liberation campaign," what he means is liberating innocent Jewish civilians from the scourge of life through the use of bomb vests and sundry other implements of liberation.

What amazes me is not that these people want to destroy Israel. What does amaze me is that they're not even subtle about it; yet the outside world continues its moral equivalency argument, its chants of "end the cycle of violence," and its assumptions that the "Palestinians" have genuine grievances.

Open Season

I received this through an email, and I thought it was a hoot. Unfortunately, I don't know the author's name, or I would give credit where credit is due.

The Pentagon announced today the formation of a new 500-man elite fighting unit called the U.S. REDNECK SPECIAL FORCES (USRSF).

These North & South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi, Missouri, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, Texas and Tennessee boys will be dropped into Iraq and have been given only the following facts about Terrorists:

1. The season opened today.

2. There is no limit.

3. They taste just like chicken.

4. They don't like beer, pickups, country music or Jesus.

5. They are DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for the death of Dale Earnhardt.

This mess in Iraq should be over IN A WEEK!

Sunday, August 21, 2005

"We're At War, Blockhead!!"

Don't you get sick of hearing that? "We're at War." Perhaps it should be printed in all capitals. For example, I might say: "Bush just signed the biggest spending increase into law since the invention of the credit card." Response: "WE'RE AT WAR!" "Bush washed his hands of the whole Schiavo situation, letting her husband have her killed with the government's consent." Response: "WE'RE AT WAR!" "We're losing our precious soldiers over in Iraq, largely for the benefit of people who neither appreciate it, nor were willing to fight for their own freedom." Response: "WE'RE AT WAR!" "Bush just dubbed Islam a 'religion of peace,' while a raghead in a bloody night-gown stood by with an AK-47, winking at the camera." Response: "WE'RE AT WAR!" "Bush calls for further Israeli Jew evictions--giving yet more territory to the 'Palestinians'--while the Arabs-in-question have made it clear that only the complete decimation of Israel will appease them." Response: "WE'RE AT WAR!" "Our liberty is being eroded by the Law of the Sea Treaty, national ID cards are on the table, and who knows what will happen next?" Response: "WE'RE AT WAR!" "Bush was just caught making a secret pact with Mephistopheles." Response: "WE'RE AT WAR!" Doesn't it get tiresome? Certain people chant this silly mantra, no matter what Bush or his administration does. At what point does such an evasive response no longer hold water? Is it limitless in its legitimacy as an excuse?

On numerous occasions, Mr. Bush or his supporters has said something to this effect: "We have to fight them in Iraq, so we don't have to fight them, here." Am I the only one who thinks that's throwing logic overboard in concrete boots? Do Mr. Bush and his slavish followers believe that every terrorist who wants to do Americans harm is in Iraq? Is Iraq a whirlpool that catches Islamic killers and never lets them go? Hardly. Our borders are wide open, with illegal aliens pouring into the country ever single day; yet we're supposed to believe that the president is concerned about our welfare and safety. A terrorist with an IQ slightly above that of a boiled potato won't have much trouble determining where the opportunities lie. I'm not sure what Mr. Bush's real reason for keeping our soldiers in Iraq is, but I can tell you with certainty what it isn't. It isn't to protect American citizens from Muslim terrorist attacks. If he truly had an inkling of interest in that, he'd shut down the borders tomorrow, and take the situation in hand. It's really heart-breaking: we have a man in the oval office who cares more about the feelings of Vicente Fox and certain activist groups like La Raza (a racist organization, if there ever was one), than he does about the lives of his own people.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Muslim terrorists already are inside our borders, plotting their next attack. In fact, I think it's likely in the extreme that another major terrorist assault on our people will occur within the next two or three years, if not sooner. I believe it will take large-scale murder and destruction--again--to get our "leaders" finally to confront the border situation. And call me cynical, but I won't be shocked if they still don't address it properly.

Our rights are diluted and flushed away, our soldiers are dying, and we face each day in grave danger, but we're at war, after all. So if you ever see George Bush hanging out at the local strip-joint with a handful of one-dollar bills, Bill Clinton at his side, don't you worry none. Don't even worry about his using the Constitution for rolling papers.

Just remember: "WE'RE AT WAR!"

Israeli Extremists

I was just watching Fox News a few minutes ago, when what to my wondering eyes should appear, but a load of malarkey, under a thin veneer.

The newsman in question--whose name escapes me--was reporting directly from Gaza. As he spoke of the demolition gangs roving about and destroying Jewish houses, he dubbed those who resisted "extremists." That actually was the word he used.

So let me get this straight: If you evict me from my home, confiscate my property and give it to someone else, and demolish my house, I am an extremist if I offer the slightest resistance? Only in a totalitarian society does that make any sense. Such a view has no place in the halls of Israel's government, or in the United States.

Adding insult to injury, the entire reasoning for these actions is futile. If evicting Jewish settlers from Gaza buys any peace at all--which is doubtful--it will be only a temporary lull in the Arab plans for annihilating Israel. Worse, Gaza will be used as a launching point for continued terrorist attacks.

I'm pro-Israel, but not pro-Sharon, necessarily. I wish I could say the same for Fox News.

Saturday, August 20, 2005

Viva La Mexico

You may not realize this, but that coke you just snorted probably came from our friends in Mexico, courtesy of our lackadaisical federal gummint! Kinda makes me wanna have a traditional south-of-the-border party, with Vicente Fox and George Bush playing the roles of pinatas.

Yet another entry in the long list of reasons why we should lock down the border and take control of this madness, before it's too late.

Friday, August 19, 2005

Nattering Nabob of the Left

Bless her heart, but Cindy Sheehan has got Problems (notice the capital P.) First, let me just say that I sympathize with her anger and grief, and I feel compassion for her loss. I think losing a child prematurely--even if they are an adult--is perhaps the worst thing I can imagine happening to an individual. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. I preface my remarks with this not because I'm all touchy feely, but because I want it understood up front that I'm not a flint-eyed stoneheart.

That said, I believe she's floating around out there in the ozone layer. For example, here are some of her highly cogent remarks of late: "We are not waging a war on terror in this country. We're waging a war of terror. The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush!" And "We are waging a nuclear war in Iraq right now. That country is contaminated. It will be contaminated for practically eternity now." She made these remarks at a "We Hate Bush" rally at San Francisco University, and according to the Drudge Report, it only gets worse from there. (WARNING: the linked article may offend some folks with its foul language). I'm no Bush fan, as most of you already know; and like any good lie, some of her statements harbor kernels of truth.

I see the situation this way: Ms. Sheehan is using the media as a tool to get her message across to the public and to have her voice heard. The left-wing media is benefiting in exploiting her pain, as well, using her as a hammer to bash Bush over the head. It's obvious that they're eating this up like sharks in a feeding frenzy. If there's one thing the lefties never pass up, it's an opportunity to make Bush and his administration look evil or stupid.

There's a facet of this story that I haven't seen addressed, though: Ms. Sheehan's son's personal philosophy. I confess ignorance, regarding his viewpoint. Was he a disgruntled, reluctant participant in our overseas military ventures; or was he patriotic, seeing them as necessary evils? I think this is an important question, regardless of one's view on the Iraq War. If the latter is true, then his mother is besmirching her son and dishonoring his memory and accomplishments, whether she admits this--or understands this--or not. Best-case scenario, the former is true. But even then, Ms. Sheehan is making herself a willing accomplice to the promotion of the American leftist agenda--an agenda which distinguishes between lies and truth only when it is beneficial to the Cause, and which champions pacifism only as long as a Republican is leading the charge.

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Self Defense Is a Great Offense

Raise your hand if you think forced eviction of Jews from their homes in Gaza will bring peace to Israel.

Abdul, put your hand down. Your vote doesn't count.

I see four possibilities for peace and tranquility in Israel:

1. All Jews must capitulate to Arab demands and voluntarily leave Israel forever.

2. All Jews must throw down their weapons and allow the Arabs to drive them into the sea.

3. All Jews must commit suicide, en masse.

Any one of these three options will make the Arabs happy--especially the second or third.

A fourth option exists. The Israeli government and citizens must come to terms with the bleak and ugly fact that a large segment in their own country will never rest or be content until it has annihilated them from the face of the earth. This sad reality stems from combining the nature of Islam, itself, with the demonic indoctrination drilled into the "Palestinians'" heads from birth to adulthood. There is no reasoning with those who see you as a blight on the Middle East and a plague upon humanity. There is no peace with those who are taught that you are subhuman and inherently evil. There is no lucid discussion with people who believe that you use the blood of non-Jews in religious ceremonies. The choice is clear--confront the situation with eyes wide open and flush political correctness, or die. The world already hates you, Israel. It will loathe you, no matter what path you take. So choose the right road, for survival's sake.

As for influential, moderate "Palestinians," they lie buried six feet under the middle ground they once trod.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

Awwwww, You Like Me, You Reeeely Do!!

Howdy, all. I see that I've been missed. It's a great feeling, to be sure. I know each of you probably shed a few tears (especially Bane), worried your fingernails right down to the quick, and organized candlelight vigils in my name. Though I never left my hometown of Bumpkin Holler, Tennessee, the search parties, reward signs, and plaintive comments touched my heart.

For you who stuck by my side, periodically checking out the blog for updates and leaving concerned well-wishes, I thank you all. Having friends--whether they be flesh and blood or tiny little voices living inside this great big box on my desk--is a beautiful thing. I'm a firm believer that one never can have too many.

For those who struck my name from their blogrolls, laughed at my discomfiture, and erased me from their memory banks. . .well. . .you're just a big bunch of faithless meanies. I may forgive you, in time; but don't be surprised if that unmarked Christmas present you receive through the mail is ticking.

I've been on an involuntary internet blackout for the past two months, or so. I was correct in my assumption that the modem was deader than Lenin. Yes, indeedy. Replacing it cost the lovely figure of seventy bucks--and being the humble and quite indigent fellow that I am--it took more time than I would have liked to come up with the extry money. At first, I figured I'd kick my blogging regularity down a notch, with posts coming once or twice a week. I hoped to use the pc at my wifey's place of employment, a modest-sized, local hotel. Alas, that didn't work out, what with all the Russian foreign exchange students mucking about the place. I believe this is a tiny part of their larger, insidious plan of conquest: one computer terminal at a time. As for utilizing the resources of the public liburial, I wasn't too keen on the idea. The place is a madhouse, and for some strange reason, I'm not overly fond of fighting the dope-smoking hippies and porn freaks for a chance to check my email. Ah, well. As they said during the Reign of Terror: C'est la vie.

With 20/20 hindsight, I wish I hadn't allowed two months to go by without updating everyone on my whereabouts. I hope y'all won't hold it agin me. If it ever happens again, just assume I'm dead. Put on the sack-cloth and ashes, mourn for twenty days, and move on. But if the good Lord's willin' an' the creek don't rise, I plan on being here for the long haul. I'm glad to see I'm not alone.

God bless each of you.